NORTON META TAG

Showing posts with label campaign finance reform. Show all posts
Showing posts with label campaign finance reform. Show all posts

15 October 2016

VICTORY: Bank CEO quits in shame. (The one Warren GRILLED) & Elizabeth Warren Asks Obama To Replace Wall Street Regulator For ‘Brazen Conduct’ 13&14OKT16

Consumer Financial Protection Bureau
THIS is a huge victory for the American financial consumer and against the bank-financial cabal on wall street. But it isn't over. john stumpf resigned (watch Sen Warren grill stumpf) as ceo of wells fraudgo/fargo and lost his $41 million severance package. He still has the profits he made from the fraud committed while ceo, and he has yet to be criminally charged. +Senator Elizabeth Warren D MA is pushing for the last two to happen. It is because of her the CFPB has the power and authority to regulate, investigate and punish the greed of the financial wall street powers that be. They are not to big to be challenged and held accountable by the CFPB. Now it is time for the Dept of Justice and the Securities and Exchange Commission to take action. This is followed by a report from +The Huffington Post on Sen Warren challenging sec chair mary jo white on her lack of regulation of investment and financial institutions. Watch the video from the Young Turks explaining why wall street hates Sen Elizabeth Warren. We need to keep Sen Warren in the Senate, please consider donating to her re-election campaign, and to other +BoldProgressives endorsed senate candidates (I did). With Hillary Clinton as president and the US Senate returned to the Democratic Party we can work together to keep America great and even make it greater for all Americans. 


BIG UPDATE: Wells Fargo CEO/bankster grilled by Elizabeth Warren suddenly quits! (Next stop jail?)
And Sen. Warren isn't finished with him yet!
CNBC reports: Warren renewed her assertion that Stumpf should be criminally investigated. She has previously said that change would only come to Wall Street if executives faced a real threat of jail time.
Thanks for being a bold progressive. -- Keith


EARLIER E MAIL
VIDEO: Elizabeth Warren just gave Wells Fargo's CEO a lesson he won't soon forget. Now she's pushing for a criminal investigation.
Rachel Maddow said last night that Warren roasted the CEO on a spit and called Warren a "force of nature when it comes to watchdogging big business and Wall Street."
Turn on images to see a screen capture from the video.
Yesterday, the CEO of Wells Fargo sat in front of the Senate Banking Committee and tried to blame low-level employees making $12 an hour for one of the most widespread frauds we've ever seen.
Elizabeth Warren wasn't having any of it.
She told him what prosecutors should have said months ago:he should resign, give back his bonuses, and face criminal charges.
This is why we elected Senator Warren -- to stand up to Wall Street fraudsters. Now she's pushing for criminal investigations, and with all the press coverage she's getting after yesterday's hearing there's real momentum.
John Stumpf, the CEO of Wells Fargo, is the #1 highest paid bank CEO in the country. And yet he claims that only low-level employees should be held accountable for a scam his company was running for at least 5 years, affecting millions of accounts.
Here's what happened: Wells Fargo created over two million bogus bank and credit card accounts using their customers’ personal information without their knowledge. When customers started getting hit with overdraft fees and late charges on accounts they didn't even know existed, Wells Fargo saw their profits soar.
The Los Angeles Times first uncovered the scam in 2013, but government investigators have found that it continued right up until this year.
As a result of the scandal, Wells Fargo has fired over 5,000 low level employees -- and not one single member of senior leadership.
Senator Warren is pushing hard for the SEC and Justice Department to prosecute the executives who oversaw and profited from Wells Fargo's fraud.
Thanks for being a bold progressive. And for supporting this bold progressive who does us proud -- Senator Elizabeth Warren.
-- Keith Rouda, PCCC organizer

Want to support the Warren wing? Senator Elizabeth Warren says, "When PCCC members donate millions in small-dollar donations and make millions of phone calls for progressive candidates, leaders in Washington, they take notice." Chip in $3 here.

Elizabeth Warren Asks Obama To Replace Wall Street Regulator For ‘Brazen Conduct’

The progressive firebrand has long warred with SEC Chair Mary Jo White, a former corporate lawyer.

 10/14/2016 06:01 am ET | Updated 2 hours ago

GARY CAMERON / REUTERS
WASHINGTON ― Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) on Friday asked President Barack Obama to replace the government’s top securities regulator for “brazen conduct” that “hurts investors, undermines administration policy, and willfully misinterprets congressional mandates.”
Warren is taking aim at Securities and Exchange Chair Mary Jo White, a former prosecutor and corporate lawyer who has long supported limiting corporate disclosures to investors. White is an Obama appointee who identifies as a political independent and often sides with a Republican commissioner. She has been in Warren’s crosshairs for years.
For years, White has scuttled a rule Congress ordered the SEC to write that would require companies to detail their political spending. By delaying the rule, White gave Republican lawmakers an opportunity to delay it even further by including language in must-pass government funding bills to put off the disclosures. Whitepublicly criticized another rule mandated by Congress that would have required the companies to disclose their use of conflict minerals ― natural resources that are mined to fund brutal violence in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. A federal court eventually negated the law, citing White’s speech against it.
In her Friday letter to President Obama calling for White’s dismissal, Warren noted that the SEC has neglected to write 19 regulations required by the 2010 Dodd-Frank law.
“She has failed to complete disclosure mandates Congress enacted in the wake of the 2008 financial meltdown, while simultaneously devoting the SEC’s limited discretionary resources to a far-reaching, anti-disclosure initiative cooked up by big business lobbyists seeking to reduce the amount of information public companies must make available to their investors,” Warren wrote.
It would be very unusual for the president to remove the SEC Chairman. SEC Commissioners are appointed with the approval of the United States Senate. But under an obscure regulation, the president has the authority to designate which of the five SEC Commissioners serve as the Chairman. There are currently only three SEC Commissioners, due in part to Republican obstruction of Obama appointees. White’s term ends in 2019, but removing her as chair and naming Democratic Commissioner Kara Stein in her place would allow another leader to set the agency’s agenda.
Warren railed against White in a June congressional hearing, saying she was “more disappointed than ever” over the SEC’s efforts to scale back corporate disclosures. White insisted the disclosures unnecessarily burden companies.
“I’ve never heard of the idea that investors want less information than they’re getting,” Warren said. “Let’s be honest about this. I cannot find and you have not produced a single investor who has complained to the SEC about getting too much information.”

The spat came amid a review of possible updates, released in April, to SEC rules that would require businesses to disclose financial risk posed by global warming, or government crackdowns on corporate profits stashed in offshore tax havens.
“More than a million people, including countless investors and former SEC commissioners, are pushing the agency to require publicly traded companies to disclose their political contributions,” Warren added.
At the same hearing, Sen. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) piled on criticism of the SEC for failing to require companies to disclose their political contributions.
“You’re hurting America,” Schumer told White. “Your priorities are out of line with what corporate America needs and America needs, and I hope when you go to bed late at night, you would think about that.”

Warren over the summer pilloried the SEC for failing to finalize rules and waivers, and for settling cases without obtaining guilty pleas. She also criticized links between the companies White oversees, and both the law firm where she once worked, and the one her husband currently runs.
Warren’s push for White’s ouster comes on the heels of her victory against Wells Fargo, embroiled in a scandal over widespread fraud. During a congressional hearing last month, Warren speared now-retired CEO John Stumpf. She called for him to resign and be “criminally investigated.” Days later, the bank’s board forced Stumpf to forfeit $41 million in unvested stock and give up his $2.8 million annual salary. He resigned on Wednesday. 
Warren, who has served as an outspoken surrogate for Democrat Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign, appears to be staking out her place in a future administration. Last month, Warren ― who has repeatedly attacked Republican nominee Donald Trump on Twitter in recent months ― signaled she would try to stop any appointment of big bank executives to Clinton’s cabinet.
“We believe Sen. Elizabeth Warren is succeeding in establishing herself as the chief financial policymaker in a potential Clinton White House,” Jaret Seiberg, managing director at the financial research firm Cowen Group, wrote in an investor memo last month. “She has threatened to stop Clinton nominees with ties to BlackRock and other firms. And she is using the bully pulpit to shape the debate over the Wells Fargo cross-selling controversy.” 

 Proof Wall Street Hates Elizabeth Warren

 Published on Oct 11, 2016
Leaked emails show just how much Wall Street can’t stand Elizabeth Warren. Cenk Uygur, host of The Young Turks, breaks it down. Tell us what you think in the comment section below. CLICK HERE to become a Wolf PAC member
http://www.tytnetwork.com/wpmember

“WALL STREET DONORS have used their financial relationship with the Democratic Party to complain bitterly about Sen. Elizabeth Warren’s, D-Mass., influence over the direction of the party, a new fundraising document reveals. At one point, the Democratic lawmaker in charge of raising cash for House Democrats attempted to reassure donors by pointing to a news story claiming that Warren does not speak for the party.

The document, a fundraising summary compiled by the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, provides a window into the relationship between the Democrats and major interest group donors. The party held meetings with donors such as Goldman Sachs and General Electric and carefully compiled their concerns, even when they whined about core progressive goals. It’s an awesome example of how money greases the wheels of Washington, D.C.

The notes were compiled on behalf of Rep. Ben Ray Luján, D-N.M., the chair of the DCCC, providing a summary of his fundraising meetings with various corporate and union donors. The DCCC did not respond to a request for comment.”

Read more here: https://theintercept.com/2016/10/11/w...

03 October 2016

OPEN DEBATE UPDATE NRA just emailed this to supporters, so we need you to vote for gun control questions 3OKT16


POLITICIANS shouldn't be afraid of the nra. Bold Progressives aren't afraid of the nra. The vast majority of Americans support common sense gun legislation, like preventing anyone on the No Fly List from buying a gun. Convicted of domestic violence, you shouldn't be able to buy a gun. Make background checks mandatory for all gun sales. People want common sense gun laws and politicians to stand against the nra. See this from the PCCC / Progressive Change Campaign Committee and click the links and vote on the Open Debate website for questions on the issues we need the presidential candidates, donald drumpf/trump and Hillary Clinton, to discuss and answer. Show the nra they will not control this presidential debate or the next administration or the next congress! Women, wives, mothers, daughters, sisters, aunts, and grandmothers are supporting questions for the next debate, click here to vote for them. And if you want to see the question I submitted (and maybe vote for it) about the CFPB click here.


The ideas with the most votes have the best chance to be asked at the next debate. VOTE NOW!
Replace conservative questions like this...
Turn on images to see Presidential Open Debate Questions.
...with progressive questions like this:
Turn on images to see Presidential Open Debate Questions.
turn on images to see a VOTE NOW image.
Below is an email the NRA sent their national membership this weekend.
For the presidential "town hall" debate on October 9, ABC and CNN moderators will ask questions with input from the Internet and have agreed to consider the Top 30 questions on the Open Debate Coalition's voting platform.
The NRA is asking their members to "help us get the Second Amendment in the presidential debate" and their question is now #3. In addition to the questions you've already voted for, can you vote for these progressive questions so the candidates debate our issues and ourframing?
Debt-Free College (question from young person with debt)
Campaign Finance Reform (a question that goes beyond Citizens United)
Expand Social Security (question from a mother and son)
Wall Street Reform/Accountability (question about Dodd-Frank)
Voting Rights (question promoted by a leading civil rights group)
Immigration Reform (submitted by 6 year old girl who doesn't want her parents taken away)
Gun Safety (question from the father of a shooting victim)
The best way to fight a bad guy with an email list...is with a good guy with an email list. Please forward this to others and fight back against the NRA.
-- Keith Rouda, PCCC organizer


---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: NRA-ILA <admin@nramedia.org>
Date: Sat, Oct 1, 2016 at 1:21 AM
Subject: Victory Can Be Ours
Turn on images to see the NRA's graphic.
NEWS

Help Us Get the Second Amendment in the Presidential Debate

Have you ever wanted to personally address the candidates during a presidential debate? Find yourself yelling questions at the moderators through your TV? Don’t worry – you’re not alone. But now, you can actually do something about it. On Sunday, October 9th at 9 p.m. eastern, Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump will once again face off as they make their cases to the American public and the moderators have agreed to ask questions submitted and voted on by the general public.
-----------------------------------------


Want to support the Warren wing? Senator Elizabeth Warren says, "When PCCC members donate millions in small-dollar donations and make millions of phone calls for progressive candidates, leaders in Washington, they take notice." Chip in $3 here.

01 October 2016

SLUDGE (drudge) mobilized votes on debate questions, YOU should vote too! 29SEP16


THE SLUDGE (drudge) Report is mobilizing republicans, tea-baggers, right wing fanatics, drumpf/trump-pence supporters to vote for Open Debates questions reflecting their agenda (just check out the vote totals so far on the 2nd Amendment and voter ID compared to Social Security and citizens united below). True BOLD PROGRESSIVES, those concerned about women's issues, Social Security, health care, campaign finance reform, wall street reform, criminal justice reform,  Hillary Clinton - Tim Kaine supporters, all are being called to action, called to vote for questions reflection our concerns, our priorities, the pressing issues facing our nation by the PCCC / Pregressive Change Campaign Committee. Click the links on the left side of the e mail below to vote for questions on our issues. If you need to check your voter registration or if you need to register to vote for click here. And remember to vote on 8 NOV 16 because democracy is not a spectator sport! 
Click HERE for the question I submitted on 1 OKT 16 to vote for it if you want.

The ideas with the most votes have the best chance to be asked at the next debate. VOTE NOW!
Turn on images to see Presidential Open Debate Questions.
Turn on images to see Presidential Open Debate Questions.
Turn on images to see Presidential Open Debate Questions.
Turn on images to see Presidential Open Debate Questions.
turn on images to see a VOTE NOW image.
SIREN! The conservative Drudge Report flooded the Open Debates voting process with thousands of right-wing voters. This could skew questions asked in the Oct. 9 presidential debate.
ABC and CNN debate moderators have agreed to receive and consider the top 30 questions on this important voting site.
Will we let questions favoring gun leniency and voter suppression win? Or will we vote up progressive priorities like expanding Social Security benefits and overturning Citizens United? Vote here for...
The Atlantic reports, "The second presidential debate will try something new. Ordinary Americans will be able to submit -- and vote on -- questions to be considered when the candidates meet again."
Voting takes just a few seconds. 
Thanks for being a bold progressive.
-- Keith Rouda, PCCC organizer
P.S. You can also make a tax deductible donation of $10 or more toward the Progressive Change Institute's pro-democracy work like Open Debates.







Want to support the Warren wing? Senator Elizabeth Warren says, "When PCCC members donate millions in small-dollar donations and make millions of phone calls for progressive candidates, leaders in Washington, they take notice." Chip in $3 here.

06 April 2016

DEMOCRACY SPRING; Countdown to the largest act of civil disobedience this century 5APR16


DEMOCRACY SPRING. This time it isn't a pro democracy movement in some autocratic country, it is a series of non-violent protest, lobbying actions and non-violent civil disobedience against citizens united, the US Supreme Court decision that legalized the selling and buying of politicians, government offices, government agencies, courts whose judges are elected and the decisions they make. Millions of people have been making their opposition to citizens united known with their primary votes. Tens of thousands, possibly hundreds of thousands of people (numbers not seen in D.C. since the massive anti war protest right before george w bush's illegal and immoral  Iraq war) will be in D.C. demanding congress pass legislation that will nullify the citizens united ruling. Check out this from one of the organizations involved, the +BoldProgressives of the Progressive Change Campaign Committee, and click the links to sign up to attend or to donate to cover expenses of this massive action or both! I will be attending on 15 & 16 of APR. And remember this, Bernie Sanders is the only 2016 presidential  candidate among the Democratic and republican candidates who doesn't accept corporate and super-pac campaign donations....


The march for campaign finance reform and voting rights that began Saturday in Philadelphia is in Delaware now. Today, the moving protest crosses into Maryland. It will continue until it reaches Washington DC onApril 10.
Turn on images to see the marchers.
The Democracy Spring march from Philadelphia to Washington DC is underway.
You can join along the route until April 10 when the marchers reach the U.S. Capitol. You can also sign up for the sit-in and protests happeningApril 11-16 at the Capitol and the big Washington DC rally and weekend of action taking place April 16-18.
-- Keith Rouda, PCCC organizer

EARLIER EMAIL:
MSNBC headline: Pro-democracy rally frightens conservative media
Starting this weekend, we and hundreds of progressive ally organizations such as 99 Rise will mobilize by the thousands to demand a democracy where the voices of everyday people can be heard. (You may remember 99 Rise from the history-making video MSNBC showed of their Citizens United protest inside the Supreme Court.) 
We will demand that Congress take immediate action to reverse Citizens United, pass public financing of elections, and overturn voter suppression laws.
Right now, activists are marching from the Liberty Bell in Philadelphia to Washington DC. There, thousands of us will gather to reclaim the U.S. Capitol in a powerful, peaceful, and massive sit-in that no one can ignore.
Mark Ruffalo, Zephyr Teachout, Lawrence Lessig, PCCC co-founders Adam Green and Stephanie Taylor, The Young Turks’ Cenk Uyger, and dozens of other public figures will join thousands of Americans risking arrest to save our democracy. (And there are lots of ways to get involved that don't risk arrest.)
Can you join us for this historic action? (Risking arrest is optional.)
More from MSNBC:
"A plan by progressive groups to stage a Washington protest on voting rights and money in politics has kicked over a hornet’s nest among conservative media....
'Some of the same radical groups involved in shutting down Donald Trump’s Chicago rally last week are plotting a mass civil disobedience movement,' warned Breitbart News in a story that led the Drudge Report for much of Wednesday and had over 12,000 comments as of Thursday afternoon."
If they are that worried, this must be good. Be part of this historic action. (Or donate $3 to fight for campaign finance reform.)
All the action begins this weekend with a 140-mile march from Philadelphia to Washington DC. (You can join the march in progress, and march for as many or as few days as you like.)
From April 11-16, PCCC co-founders Adam Green and Stephanie Taylor will join dozens of public figures and thousands of others who will risk arrest in one of the largest nonviolent civil disobedience actions in a generation. (Training will be available and required and legal services will be provided.) They'll be supported by thousands more who will participate in legal protests without risking arrest
Two weeks of escalating protest and media attention will culminate in a massive weekend of action April 16-18 with teach-ins, concerts, grassroots lobbying, and a huge rally in Washington DC.
This will be like the Keystone tar sands action in 2014 -- shifting the national debate as never before to the urgency of this crisis and the overwhelming demand for proposals to solve it.
Thanks for being a bold progressive.
-- Keith Rouda, PCCC organizer


Want to support the Warren wing? Senator Elizabeth Warren says, "When PCCC members donate millions in small-dollar donations and make millions of phone calls for progressive candidates, leaders in Washington, they take notice." Chip in $3 here.
FOLLOW US:
Follow on Facebook
Follow on Twitter
Follow on Instagram
Subscribe on YouTube





Paid for by the Progressive Change Campaign Committee PAC (www.BoldProgressives.org) and not authorized by any candidate or candidate's committee. Contributions to the PCCC are not deductible as charitable contributions for federal income tax purposes.

03 November 2015

America's Views Align Surprisingly Well With Those of "Socialist" Bernie Sanders & This Is Bernie Sanders' Plan to Beat Hillary Clinton 19MAI&26JUN15

SEN BERNIE SANDERS I VT has a lot in common with the American people, and has a lot to offer them to. He is a candidate dedicated to improving the lives of the 99% without fearing the reaction of the 1%. Throw off your fear of the word "Socialist", check out these two stories from earlier this year from +Mother Jones and check out Bernie on the issues at Bernie 2016
and remember, Democracy isn't a spectator sport, and if the 99% vote the 1% won't matter!

So what does that make us?

| Tue May 19, 2015 5:15 AM EDT
Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont, a self-described socialist, is an extremely long shot to defeat Hillary Rodham Clinton in the Democratic presidential primary. Does that mean his views on key political issues are too radical for America's voters? Not necessarily. Here's how his policy positions actually fare in the polls:

socialism

Sanders: Describes himself as a democratic socialist.
His fellow Americans: While only 31 percent of Americans react positively to the word "socialism," just 50 percent view "capitalism" in favorable terms, according to a recent Pew survey. Among 18- to 29-year-olds, nearly half had a positive view of "socialism," while only 47 percent viewed "capitalism" favorably.

income Taxes

Sanders: Famously filibustered the 2010 extension of Bush tax cuts for wealthy Americans.
His fellow Americans: In a February poll, 68 percent of likely voters said wealthy households pay too little in federal taxes.

estate taxes
Sanders: Introduced the Responsible Estate Tax Act last year. If passed, it would raise top estate tax rates and expand the tax to include estates worth more than $3.5 million. (It currently only applies to those worth more than $5.4 million, which covers only 0.2 percent of American estates.)
His fellow Americans: Results vary, but Kevin Drum notes that the estate tax (conservatives call it the "death tax") is generally unpopular.

Offshore tax havens
Sanders: Introduced legislation that would crack down on offshore tax havens by requiring American companies to pay the top corporate tax rate on profits held abroad.
His fellow Americans: Eighty-five percent of small business owners favor closing overseas tax loopholes entirely, while 68 percent of Americans believe "we should close tax loopholes for large corporations that ship jobs offshore."

Campaign finance reform
Sanders: Advocates a constitutional amendment that would effectively prevent corporations from making political donations. Supports public funding of elections.
His fellow Americans: Most Americans believe that corporations should have at least some limited right to make political donations. Even so, in a 2013 Gallup poll, half of the respondents said they would personally vote for banning all political donations from individuals and private groups and shifting to a government-funded campaign finance system. Only 44 percent would oppose such a law.

Climate change
Sanders: Cosponsored the 2013 Climate Protection Act, which would tax carbon and methane emissions and rebate three-fifths of the revenue to citizens.
His fellow Americans: Sixty-four percent of Americans strongly or somewhat favor regulating greenhouse gas emissions from power plants, factories and cars, and requiring utilities to generate more power from low-carbon sources. However, only 34 percent of Americans support a carbon tax with a $500 rebate.

Health Care
Sanders: Advocates for a single-payer health care system.
His fellow Americans: A January 2015 poll found that just over 50 percent of likely voters support single-payer.

regulating wall street
Sanders: The big banks "are too powerful to be reformed," Sanders says on his website. "They must be broken up."
His fellow Americans: A recent poll by the Progressive Change Institute found that 58 percent of likely voters support "breaking up big banks like Citigroup."

Education

Sanders: Introduced legislation this month to make public college tuition free in the United States.
His fellow Americans: Sixty-three percent of likely voters support President Obama's proposal to offer qualifying students two free years of community college. No recent polls have tested support for offering free tuition at four-year colleges and universities.

trade
Sanders: Opposes the Trans Pacific Partnership and similar trade deals.
His fellow Americans: Sixty-two percent of voters oppose fast-track authority for the TPP trade deal, but fewer Americans oppose the agreement itself. A 2014 Pew poll put support for the TPP among Americans at 55 percent.

Pay equity for women
Sanders: Supports a federal law mandating equal pay for equal work.
His fellow Americans: Most Americans agree that women face pay discrimination, but only about one-third favor addressing the problem via legislation.

Wages
Sanders: Supports raising the minimum wage to $15 an hour "over the next few years."
His fellow Americans: Sixty-three percent of Americans support raising the minimum wage to $15 by 2020.

Unions
Sanders: Supports legislation allowing workers to form a union by signing pledge cards.
His fellow Americans: A Gallup poll conducted in 2009, when card check legislation was being debated in Congress, found that 53 percent of Americans "favor a new law that would make it easier for labor unions to organize workers."

Social Services
Sanders: "Instead of cutting Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, and nutrition programs," Sanders writes on his website, "we should be expanding these programs."
His fellow Americans: Some polls have found that majorities of voters want to expand Social Security. A poll conducted last year showed that even voters in red states want to expand Medicaid.
Thumbs-Up icon by Nick Holroyd/The Noun Project

And without any attack ads.

| Fri Jun. 26, 2015 5:00 AM EDT

It's fortunate for Hillary Clinton that Sen. Bernie Sanders, the independent socialist from Vermont who is challenging her for the Democratic presidential nomination, despises and eschews negative advertising. That's because the political consulting firm that Sanders has retained to advise his campaign has a well-developed expertise in devising attack ads. Earlier this year, this outfit, Devine Mulvey Longabaugh, won a Pollie award from the American Association of Political Consultants for creating the best Democratic congressional ad of 2014. The spot slammed Dave Trott, a Republican running for a congressional seat in Michigan, for making millions of dollars by foreclosing on residents of his state, and it focused on the harrowing eviction of a 101-year-old Detroit woman. Trott survived this assault and handily won the seat in the Republican district, but the Washington Post called the commercial "one of the most brutal attack ads you'll ever see."
The Sanders campaign has no plans to hurl these kinds of ads at Clinton. As Tad Devine, the veteran political operative who leads this firm and a longtime adviser to Sanders, notes, mudslinging is not part of the campaign strategy that Sanders and his advisers have crafted. There won't even be one speck of dust directly tossed at Clinton. But, Devine tells me, implicit negative messages aimed at Clinton will certainly be "embedded" in Sanders' advertising and social media messaging.
ADVERTISEMENT
Sanders does have an overall plan on how to beat Clinton. As Devine explains, it goes something like this: Raise enough money to devote significant resources to building a full operation and maintaining a media presence in the early states of Iowa and New Hampshire, as well as Nevada and South Carolina. At the same time, develop a basic foundation for campaign organizations in other states, so if Sanders fares well in the initial contests, these preliminary outfits can quickly be built out. Devine and other Sanders advisers estimate they will need to raise $40-$50 million by the Iowa caucuses to be in such a position, and they claim Sanders is on track to hit that mark, mainly with thousands and thousands of low-dollar contributions. (Sanders has drawn crowds of thousands at recent campaign events.) "I don't know if we can outright beat her in Iowa and New Hampshire," Devine says, "but we have a real shot at it in both places."
Sanders has survived and thrived in politics by neutralizing negative ads and resisting the urge to attack.
And when—or if—that happens, Devine figures, Sanders will have about a million contributors already on his side, and this group will enthusiastically kick in more money to replenish Sanders' coffers and fund the continuation of Bernie-mentum. "I worked for Walter Mondale in 1984," Devine recalls, "but I saw what Gary Hart did." Hart, a former senator who went up against Mondale in a bid for the Democratic presidential nomination, placed a surprising second in Iowa and won New Hampshire. "Things then moved fast. Some polls moved 50 points in seven days," Devine says. (Mondale, though, did end up squelching the Hart insurgency by exploiting the Democratic establishment in key states.)
If Sanders does score well in the early states, Devine insists, his campaign will have a delegate-accumulation strategy reminiscent of the one Barack Obama's 2008 campaign employed to focus as much on snagging delegates as winning caucuses and primaries. "Even if Clinton beats us in some states by 20 points, we can split the delegates with smart focusing," Devine says. And then Sanders will be in a position to make the case to the Democratic establishment that he can assemble an electorate in the general election that is favorable to Democrats (as Obama did in 2008). "We don't know yet what it will look like," Devine remarks. "We haven't done the strategic modeling yet. I've been trying to persuade Bernie we should do that." Instead, he says, Sanders at this point would rather concentrate on promoting his message: Inequality is killing the middle class, climate change must be addressed, big-money politics must be reformed, and new progressive policy ideas, such as free college tuition and expanded Social Security benefits, must be advanced. (Devine also gave Sanders a PowerPoint presentation on how the campaign can use Big Data methods: "He was impressed, but we're not sure we can scale up to that. We won't have $1 billion.")
And what about Clinton? How will Sanders take her on?
Sanders recently boasted that he has "never run a negative ad," noting that he "hates and detests these 30-second negative ads." Devine says this is part of Sanders' DNA. "You need to know Bernie's history with negative ads to get this," Devine says. In 1988, when Sanders was the mayor of Burlington, Vermont, he ran for an open congressional seat as an independent and lost a close race to Republican Peter Smith. Two years later, Sanders was back to challenge Smith. In that 1990 race, Smith aired tough ads assailing Sanders, and Sanders' aides advised him to hit back. Instead, Sanders bought airtime for a five-minute spot in which he talked straight to the camera and decried the attack ads. (It didn't hurt Sanders that the National Rifle Association was slamming Smith for having voted for a ban on semi-automatic weapons.) Sanders ended up winning that race by 16 points. "This was his formative experience," says Devine. "Negative ads have to be denounced and jiu-jitsued."
"We have to present the differences in the ads without him coming across as part of the political system," says Tad Devine, Sanders' longtime strategist and ad man.
During his 1994 re-election race, Sanders had a close call. He won by only three points. He responded by doing what he swore he would never do: He hired a Washington consultant, Devine. But he told Devine he would stick to his no-negative-ads stance. In the next election, Sanders aired only positive spots and won by 22 points.
Ten years later, Sanders ran for the Senate, with Devine still advising him. His Republican opponent was a millionaire businessman named Rich Tarrant who dumped about $7 million into the race in a state where, Devine says, no candidate had ever spent more than $2 million on a campaign. "It was a vicious campaign against Bernie," Devine recalls. "He ran ads that accused Bernie of supporting child molesters and terrorists. Chuck Schumer and Harry Reid were telling Bernie, 'You must respond.'" Sanders replied with an ad Devine had cut, in which Sanders noted he was being unfairly attacked and asked voters to visit his website to get the truth. Subsequent commercials by Sanders attempted to refute the stream of attack ads from Tarrant. The Sanders campaign also pushed an ad in which country singer Willie Nelson endorsed Sanders and cited his work for family farmers. Sanders beat Tarrant by more than a 2-1 margin.
So Sanders has survived and thrived in politics by neutralizing negative ads and resisting the urge to attack. And part of his shtick is that he doesn't do conventional politics. So, Devine notes, he will not directly criticize or poke at Clinton. For sure, no personal attacks or cheap shots. "That won't help him," Devine says. "He rejects the status quo of politics." Sanders won't even do a straight-up contrast ad—as in, Bernie Sanders believes X about subject Y, but Hillary Clinton believes Z. "If we do that, we're done," Devine says. "If we do a classic comparative ad, it's over. We'll have to be smarter."
And Team Sanders does have what it considers to be a smarter way: implying a contrast. In previous campaigns, Devine says, "We have constantly embedded contrast in everything we do." One example: During the 2006 Senate race, Tarrant's residence became a political issue because he had claimed a Florida mansion as his home for tax purposes. Sanders ran a biographical ad in which he declared he worked in Washington and lived in Burlington—an indirect jab at Tarrant. In the campaign against Clinton, Devine notes, "There will be a lot of implicit negative. But it won't look negative. It won't feel negative."
That's how Sanders recently handled the Trans-Pacific Partnership trade pact. He opposes the measure as a sop to corporate America and billionaires. Asked about Clinton's view—she has referred positively to this trade deal in the past but more recently has avoided stating a firm position—Sanders didn't proclaim that she's in bed with the 1 percent; he called on her to take a clear stance. "It's not a question of watching this," he said. "You're going to have determine which side are you on." Devine points out that "this is not negative, but contrasting. When you offer voters a contrast on the issues, they don't take that as a negative." He adds that Sanders is "very good at this."
Contrast without attacking—that's the mantra. "As someone making the ads, it will be a difficult challenge," Devine says. "We have to present the differences in the ads without him coming across as part of the political system." Devine fears that if Sanders crosses that line, the Clinton campaign will fire back hard: "They have all the tonnage. We're dead."